The U.S. Government Is Trying To Take Away Your Pocket Knives!

[Morris Dovey]

Of course. When your number is up, who better to make you gonzo?

;-)

[Han]

Morris Dovey wrote in news:4a34fe46$0$87067$ [e-mail]:

I see your wink, and I take it that you really don't condone von Brunn's actions any more than those of the 9/11 hijackers.

[J. Clarke]

I'm curious as to why you seem to be condoning the actions of the other several thousand murderers who commit their crimes every year and singling out this one guy who shot an armed security guard.

[Han]

"J. Clarke" wrote in news: [e-mail]:

I do not condone any murderous acts by anyone, nor the complacencies that would/could allow any of them. Is that not clear yet?

[John Grossbohlin]

This isn't really a response to the above, it simply adds dimension to the complexity of the issues at hand.

Another aspect of criminal/terrorist deterrent discussion that seldom seems to come up is the notion of "goal oriented attackers." If someone is bent on causing harm weapons substitution will get them around any legal restrictions on guns, knives, or explosives. As an example of how anything could be used as a weapon a recent episode of Time Warp had a guy using everything from ball point pens to scissors to screwdrivers and crowbars as "throwing" weapons. Jackie Chan's movies bring up even more examples... even if some are bizarre! Ban handguns and then more lethal long guns become more prevalent.

Add in common household chemicals, simply ignoring the restrictions on "real" weapons, and the theft of "real" weapons (even from police and military) and a goal oriented attacker can still carry out his deeds. Add in substance abuse, mental defect, and a zeal for control as motives and it becomes clear that it is impossible to stop all of it... especially the lone wolf types who keep their mouths shut.

It's a pretty interesting subject for which there are no "sound bite" answers.

Anyhow, back on the topic of the Customs proposals and things like utility knives and box knives suddenly become illegal... so substitute a fixed blade sheathed knife for work or crime and they've accomplished nothing. First responders often have need for one hand operation as well as those with disabilities. Thus they'd also be hurting "legitimate" users even if they think people don't need the functionality.

John

[Swingman]

me, we WILL see efforts at some time in the future to institute something similar in this country ... guaranteed!

[HeyBub]

Your point is well-taken, but we don't know whether they tried shotguns, nets, or most any other devices. We do know they tried snake-charmers with poor results. It could be, as you suggest, they simply used what's at hand. Or maybe they tried tear gas or pepper-spray, rock music, pictures of Madonna, prayer, fasting, and a call to the White House, but the only thing that sort-of worked was a machine gun.

I thought you were asking for a civilian use for a machine gun and, since I happened to see this article today, thought it might satisfy your requirements.

[HeyBub]

The issue is not the VA; the issue is whether you could take a utility knife to the job site - actually whether you could BUY a utility knife to take to the job site. More specifically, whether you could buy a knife that had been imported so you could take it to a job site. That wasn't a VA hospital.

My head hurts.

[Han]

"John Grossbohlin" wrote in news:Ta6dnQ8JgukthqjXnZ2dnUVZ [e-mail]:

I agree completely, hence my refereences to common sense and its absence.

Nevertheless, it is a "pity" that someone could kill a security guard with a weapon that should not have been in his possession (considering his frame of mind). I doubt that anything Jacky Chan-like would have had that effect.

[Morris Dovey]

Of course not, but please be wary of over-simplifying. As soon as you make it impossible for ordinary citizens to have a weapon, you will have created the social environment in which broken individuals blow themselves up in crowded places.

Life demands a certain minimum of courage.

Those who cannot muster that minimum are not made more secure by disempowering others - ever.

[Dave Balderstone]

Who, in your opinion, should be allowed to decide whether or not a legally available item should be in the possession of any particular individual?

As a further exercise, what legally available items should be in that decision tree?

[Dave Balderstone]

Morris, that doesn't scan. Many broken individuals are blowing themselves up in crowded social environments that are flooded with weapons.

[Han]

Dave Balderstone wrote in news:140620091728347964%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca:

I never said it would be easy to decide where the dividing line should be. To me it is common sense that should dictate it. Go see Gran Torino, and decide who should or should not have had weapons. To me it seems easy. I for one should not have dangerous stuff, because I'm a hot head. And because the only experience with "fire weapons" that I had was at a carnival when I was 16.

[Leon]

Just watched Grand Torino about 1 hour ago. If the police did not have so many ridiculous protectionism laws to have to tip toe through to keep from violating a murderers rights perhaps they could work on the real problems more efficiently. Perhaps if we ere not becoming so defenseless there would not be so much crime. Trying to protect the public from itself results in more crime.

If you remember in the movie, Clint Eastwood was not killed until he was defenseless, when he carried a gun he was on more equal ground.

[karmstrn]

to

> John

The above quote says "spring- and release-assisted opening mechanisms..." How does that apply to a pocketknife that you have to pull open?

[Han]

"Leon" wrote in news:K9GdnawO1In1FqjXnZ2dnUVZ [e-mail]:

He felt at the end that he was near the end of his life. To be able to get the gang members in jail he sacrificed himself, in full knowledge of what was going to happen. Nothing in that movie said that shooting was good. Standing up for oneself and others when being harassed or worse was all he did.

I sure hope that it will be a long time before we all need to carry concealed guns in order to feel safe.

[HeyBub]

I don't carry a concealed handgun to feel safe; I carry a concealed handgun so the goblins don't.

In the thirteen years I've carried a concealed handgun, I've felt it necessary to expose it three times.

Two of those were in Home Depot parking lots!

[HeyBub]

It doesn't. Read more. They're after knives that can be opened with one hand.

[Morris Dovey]

You're scanning backwards. It's not the guns or explosives that produce the causes, it's the social environment that produces the behaviors.

At the risk of over-generalizing, when too much freedom is removed, those who still have hope that something can be salvaged opt for the wherewithal to resist, and those who see no light at the end of their tunnel become willing make the "ultimate sacrifice"...

...not always explosively - one of the memories I'd most like to lose is of a Buddhist monk soaking himself with gasoline in the middle of a street and setting himself on fire.

[Bob S.]

Give it a friggin break... Jeessus. You want to use an automatic weapon for hunting rabbits..go do it. My point being it is idiotic and you seem to want to argue any point no matter what. No thanks.